this post was submitted on
1,624 points (62% like it)
4,187 up votes 2,563 down votes

gifs

unsubscribe345,440 readers

825 users here now

Links to amusing, interesting, or funny .gifs from the web! .gif format submissions only, please!

How to make your own animated gifs?

Please try not to repost and post reaction gifs in /r/reactiongifs.

Looking for a specific gif? Try /r/gifrequests

Direct image links preferred! Avoid pages that have other extraneous material besides the gif like headers, banners, ads, etc. And please, no blogspam. URL-shorteners are NOT allowed!

Witty titles optional. nsfw when necessary; this implies the comments within will be too.

Nudity and obscene material goes into /r/nsfw_gifs - No exceptions. If it can get you fired then it should not be here. Failure to comply will result in removal of post and banning.

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

top 200 commentsshow all 228

[–]kgu123 373 points374 points ago

The best part is that he's so proud that he "blocked" it

[–]workpuppy 181 points182 points ago

Instant karma. If he'd been a little more humble, he'd have noticed it was on its way in.

[–]SecondSophistic 151 points152 points ago

It does look like he's boasting, you're right, but I'm also inclined to believe he was pounding his hand over his heart as if to indicate that he was nervous.

edit: I just wanted to believe the best of the guy. Ah, well.

[–]slayer1o00 24 points25 points ago

I'm sorry everyone downvoted you for having a different opinion.

[–]Captain_Karma 13 points14 points ago

-30 karma? For a plausible possibility that just happens to go against the beautiful idea of instant Karma? (Sort of Ironic) Sheesh. I can't save you, but here's an upvote... It's the best I can do.

[–]1stOnRt1 11 points12 points ago

CAPTAIN KARMA, To the rescue!

[–]iPodLurker 0 points1 point ago

Be nice Reddit

[–]SqueamishCow -2 points-1 points ago

Holy shit people what did he do?

[–]Color_Bars -2 points-1 points ago

I'm sorry that it takes someone else's comment to save you from senseless downvotes. People are strange.

[–]bananabombboy 0 points1 point ago

Looked more like he was pounding his crest.

As if to say he loves his Club, not sure what game this is from.

Edit: he does indeed kiss the badge at the end

[–]towelrod 4 points5 points ago

I don't know why people are downvoting this, it looks a lot like he's tapping his crest.

For people who don't follow soccer, the jerseys have a team crest on them, and when players do something like score a goal or save a penalty, they look up at the fans and tap the crest. I can't tell in this picture if he's looking at the opposing fans and taunting them, or looking at his own fans and saying "that was for you".

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]biga29 31 points32 points ago

His hand is clearly open.

Saying "Look at me. I'm awesome."

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]BigNikiStyle 23 points24 points ago

Sorry Rhaegar, looks like this comment thread is your Trident.

[–]creepyearl -1 points0 points ago

What are you doing out of the game of thrones?

[–]smaug13 -5 points-4 points ago

did you seriously get 150 downvotes!? enjoy your positive karma you have now!

[–]Pineapple23 57 points58 points ago

I know nothing about soccer, does that count as a goal?

[–]ljshea1 188 points189 points ago

Ball cross line=goal

[–]1mannARMEE 192 points193 points ago

Unless it's England vs Germany !

[–]Trilink26 60 points61 points ago

Ohhhh!

[–]OzymandiasReborn 4 points5 points ago

or USA. Two games in a row. fuckers...

[–]jack_spankin 23 points24 points ago

Or Ukraine.

[–]typical_me 22 points23 points ago

Ukraine was offside before the goal went in if you want to get technical

[–]clamscantfeel 35 points36 points ago

We don't.

[–]typical_me 7 points8 points ago

And why not?

2 officials, each with 1 job, and BOTH failed. the offside and the "goal" both went unnoticed. Why does the ball crossing the line take preference?

[–]clamscantfeel 9 points10 points ago

I don't want to get technical. /joke

[–]deadnoob 1 point2 points ago

Two reasons:

I think seeing a ball go over the line is, in almost all cases, a much easier job than determining if a player is offside. For the first, you only have to look at the ball to see if it crosses the line. Offside requires a linesman to simultaneously look at the passer and the receiver to see when the ball leaves the foot and where the receiver is at that moment.

The more important reason in my eyes is that the first would be so simple to remove from the game by adding some form of goal line technology. A sensor in the ball will work just fine. I think people get so worked up about missed goal line calls is because they are so damn easy to remove from the game without having any adverse effects on the play. As far as I know, offside "technology" does not exist. There is of course instant replay, but I honestly don't know if that would work very well in football. Some say it would be fine, but I've seen so many times where play continuing has led to an advantage for a team. If play were stopped all those times for replays, it would definitely have an effect on the game.

[–]therealduffin 0 points1 point ago

Actually, the role of linesman is not limited to spotting infractions of the offside rule as they are also expected to observe the game and advise the referee on any instances of fouls or violent/unsporting conduct.

[–]jack_spankin 1 point2 points ago

The offsides wasn't even called which is one issue, but the goal was called and it was completely wrong.

Goal verification is needed. It's absolutely ridiculous they cannot figure this shit out.

[–]pinklady968 -1 points0 points ago

The referee didn't call it on time so that doesn't matter

[–]typical_me 0 points1 point ago

That's not how the rules work. How many times has a ball crossed the line and players celebrate, only to be told it was offside a few seconds later?

It does matter, and you are wrong

[–]Antilulz 2 points3 points ago

that was delayed Wembley Karma

[–]PrimaryReason 0 points1 point ago

OH GOD WHY ಠ_ಠ

[–]patrimac -1 points0 points ago

I dont understand that reference, could you elaborate

[–]DubiumGuy 5 points6 points ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WML0aP4jo_g

Alongside the lack of punishment for players who fake a dive or injury just to gain a free kick, its goals like that that are also turning football into a joke of a sport. Despite being born and raised in the city the modern rules of the game were devised in, I cant fucking stand the game these days.

[–]patrimac 1 point2 points ago

So I'm guessing they didnt change the call after they watched the playback? That really sucks

[–]the_walrus_was_ringo 2 points3 points ago

They don't watch the playback. That's the thing. There are no video referees.

[–]Arghgonaut 5 points6 points ago

Can't change it as they don't view playback. Everyone wants goal line technology except Sepp Blatter the president of Fifa, footballs ruling body.

He's a massive corrupt cunt.

[–]corell 2 points3 points ago

You are confused, Sepp Blatter wants line-tech asap, it is scheduled to be debated the 5th of july. The president of UEFA Michel Platini is against it, but it doesnt matter because FIFA>UEFA.

[–]Arghgonaut 1 point2 points ago

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal-line_technology

He changed his mind in 2010. Still corrupt though.

[–]therealduffin 1 point2 points ago

I hate Sepp Blatter as much as anyone but he is actually in favour on bringing in goal line technology, it's Platini who is against it.

[–]the_walrus_was_ringo 0 points1 point ago

England vs. Germany, in the 2010 world cup. Ball clearly went over the line but due to video referees not existing in football, it wasn't allowed because the referees didn't see it.

[–]1mannARMEE 0 points1 point ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2C7ZMahWOg

There you go, a sad moment for football.

[–]ExK4 -1 points0 points ago

There was a questionable call as to whether the ball was in in England vs. Germany in Euro 2012. There are no video reviews in any soccer league I'm aware of.

[–]KungfuDojo 0 points1 point ago

Watched this game and this time it wasn't over the line.

[–]therealduffin 0 points1 point ago

Are you joking? The commenter you were replying to was referring to England vs Germany at the World Cup in South Africa, which I presume is the same game you are referring to since England didn't play Germany at Euro 2012.

As you can tell from this photo, the ball clearly crosses the line.

[–]KungfuDojo 1 point2 points ago

I was referring to an england game of THIS europe cup. The poster also mentioned 2012. You are right though that those teams didn't play against each other this europe cup and I cannot recall exactly in which game there was a close line decision. I only recall england OR germany was involved.

The africa world cup decision was definitely wrong and should have been a goal. Nobody will argue there.

[–]therealduffin 0 points1 point ago

It was England vs Ukraine in which the controversial decision was made and while it was a lot closer than the incident in South Africa, I would say that ball does indeed cross the line. Having said that though, there was a ball played forwards to a player in an offside position in the build-up so it wouldn't have counted anyway.

[–]flip_flap 0 points1 point ago

England didn't play Germany at Euro 2012. Do you mean 2010 world cup? Lampard's shot then definitely went over the line - there's no doubt.

[–]whooooshh 0 points1 point ago

wait wait stop. explain it to me like i'm five.

[–]ljshea1 15 points16 points ago

                  |
                  |        \(•.•)/ gooooooooal!

O ----> | | |

Are you a visual learner?

[–]kgu123 18 points19 points ago

Yes it does

[–]LastImmortalMan 1 point2 points ago

If the ball bounced high past the 18 yard line and then rolled back, would that still count? IF the ref blows the whistle for the next shooter to take his place, does this invalidate the ball movement?

[–]icecrmsandwich 4 points5 points ago

The refs in soccer have the absolute say in everything so if he has signaled for the next shooter means the current kick is over.

My guess is that as long as the ref has not blown the whistle for the next shooter to kick the ball, the rolling back ball is technically still valid but someone would have probably kicked it out of the way and no ref in the right mind will consider that interfering with the penalty kick. (Also, they usually use the same ball for the next kick so someone would have picked it up)

[–]Exaskryz -1 points0 points ago

I believe the whistle would invalidate the ball's movement. But I can't say for sure. As for bouncing past the 18 and rolling back... I suppose that it'd be fine.

[–]sea_cucumber -1 points0 points ago

Yards in football? ಠ_ಠ (Yes, football.)

[–]LastImmortalMan 0 points1 point ago

Yup, in Canada most soccer fields are actually football fields. Easier to say yards because of the lines already on the field.

[–]Cullly 0 points1 point ago

Yes Yards.

In Ireland and England, I've only ever heard of Yards being used for these lines. See this link for clarification. I am 35 and I've always called that the 18 yard line or 'the box'.

[–]sea_cucumber 0 points1 point ago

TIL people use non-metric measurements for football soccer as well. Thank you.

[–]Cullly 0 points1 point ago

Yep. We have a game called "football" in Ireland too (Gaelic Football) so Soccer or Football is the normal term here... Unlike England where only Football is used and USA where Soccer seems to be the only allowed term (based on reddit comments anyway).

[–]goofball_jones 4 points5 points ago

Is this that hockey-like game where the kids play with a ball because they can't afford skates or don't have a rink near them?

[–]LightningRider 5 points6 points ago

What are you, american ?

[–]Pineapple23 76 points77 points ago

Yes.

[–]R0SH 26 points27 points ago

Could have been some weird penalty shot/free kick rule thing.

Like, in hockey, you can't move backwards on a penalty shot or its an illegal move.

Chill dude. Not everyone watches football.

[–]sawu 9 points10 points ago

In fact, there is indeed a weird penalty shot rule. This is from a penalty shootout, and there something like a rule that states that the ball can be called dead once the ball has finished it's original forward momentum. Though it's up to the interpretation of the referee as to whether this counts. Personally I'd say by that definition it shouldn't count.

From the interpretation the rules of the game by FIFA (link):

the ball is in play when it is kicked and moves forward.

Now, this could be interpreted so that if it hits the post and then the keeper and goes in, then that shouldn't count. Which is where I imagine it helps to give the ref the freedom to make a decision.

(However, should be said that this is no longer in the current guidelines, which can be found here: http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame/interpretation/index.html (penalties come under law 14).

[–]professorpan 3 points4 points ago

[–]sycodrive 0 points1 point ago

Looks like a sold out game...

[–]Martin_Samuelson 0 points1 point ago

You are only looking at the interpretations page. Law 14 in the Laws of the Game states "The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed." Link End of story.

[–]sawu 1 point2 points ago

Yeah, I was trying to get that across, "Though it's up to the interpretation of the referee as to whether this counts". The interpretations are more like guidelines and the referee has final decision. In this case it did indeed count and people can debate about whether they agree or not, but that's a separate issue.

I wasn't trying to say it shouldn't have counted, just noting that there actually is a relevant rule which could have meant the goal didn't stand.

[–]DePiddy 1 point2 points ago

But if this were to happen in hockey, it would count as a goal, no?

[–]docblue 4 points5 points ago

...I could not see a hockey puck doing this.

[–]toebox 6 points7 points ago

I can't see the hockey puck doing anything, I'm always so confused.

[–]docblue 1 point2 points ago

watch the players not the puck. that little fucker is fast.

[–]DePiddy 0 points1 point ago

Shit, I always forget that ice hockey isn't played on grass.

If a puck is stopped by the goalie, but then rolls into the net on its own, it's a goal.

[–]docblue 0 points1 point ago

if a goalie stopped the puck it's not going to roll in on it's own and if it does go in the goalie didn't stop it.

there's simply not enough friction for this type of thing to happen on ice.

[–]GraffyHooves 0 points1 point ago

I don't think it would be possible since a spinning puck still has no traction on ice, but even if it did happen most likely the ref would have blown it dead after the initial shot. The only thing close to happening is if it hit the goalie's pad, then the post, then off the back of his pad but most likely it would be a goal.

[–]DePiddy 0 points1 point ago

Very little traction on ice. Pucks can get spin on them. An odd shot that flicks up off the goalie's pad, bounces into the air, spinning vertically, lands and then freely rolls into the net. It would have to be a lot of spin and some snowy ice, but it could happen.

I was asking more about the general idea, not whether or not a puck is physically capable of doing this on ice.

[–]dr_rentschler 0 points1 point ago

no worries dude, we love you guys no matter what

[–]Jgschultz15 0 points1 point ago

In my high school pk shootouts you cant go backwards or stop after youve started running to the ball

[–]vertigo1083 4 points5 points ago

What he meant was if the ball was still in play after being blocked, or not.

But yes, in America, MMA is more watched than football (soccer).

[–]codemanh 4 points5 points ago

Not this Euro cup. The games have been getting over a 2.5 rating in the middle of the work days.

[–]kael13 0 points1 point ago

What's MMA?

[–]Cullly 0 points1 point ago

I'm pretty sure if this happens during a penalty shootout that it doesn't count either.

In normal play.. of course.

[–]Marine08902 0 points1 point ago

Even if the goalie stops the ball but is at all behind the line it's a goal.

[–]11oops 2 points3 points ago

Nope. The entire balls must cross the entire line for it to count. The goalkeeper's position has no effect on whether or not it's a goal.

[–]Marine08902 1 point2 points ago

Hmmm, well that's unfortunate, 'cause that happened to me when I was in sixth grade. I was pretty embarrassed.

[–]David_Crockett 7 points8 points ago

Talk about embarrassment.

[–]Oosticus 171 points172 points ago

And then the goalie was murdered by fans.

Because soccer.

[–]Mentalseppuku 13 points14 points ago

Yup, pretty much

Edit: Some are confused, this isn't the goalie from the link, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUW8wFOytiY

[–]sorenr 14 points15 points ago

wow. He really did get killed for it. Maybe not because of soccer, but because of money.

[–]Mentalseppuku 6 points7 points ago

My link was to a different player who scored an own goal while trying to break up a pass.

[–]BZAGENIUS 4 points5 points ago

Yes, but what I believe sorener was saying is that he was probably murdered over money, not soccer.

As in, him kicking that goal probably messed with a lot of organised crime gambling, and a drug lord had him killed.

At least that's what I'm assuming he is referring to.

[–]4realthistime[!] 1 point2 points ago

That was weeks ago motherfucker!

Besides, there was other shit like cartels and women involved...

[–]MADBARZ[!] 4 points5 points ago

Wrong guy...

[–]Mentalseppuku 12 points13 points ago

Yeah my link isn't the goalie, it's another soccer player who was murdered for a mistake.

Because soccer.

[–]bakdom146 3 points4 points ago

Because drug kingpins.

FTFY

[–]SporkV 1 point2 points ago

Thats absolutely nuts....

[–]SetToGeek 53 points54 points ago

Forgot who this was, but if I remember correctly this is the second time (edit: this was the first gaff) he has done something very similar--let a goal score due to arrogance.

Edit: this is the guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Askri

This is the other gaff (which he follows with an action even stupider): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5YA3exiu8I

[–]mcstain 8 points9 points ago

In that second video did he just bail off the field with 5 minutes to go?

[–]SetToGeek 16 points17 points ago

Yes, forcing his manager to substitute him. Also, 5 minutes to go in the half, so another 50 minutes of play.

[–]mcstain 24 points25 points ago

Cool, so not only is he arrogant, but a sore loser as well. How embarrassing.

[–]DubiumGuy 4 points5 points ago

What a dickhead.

[–]bri_rae 5 points6 points ago

Ha. Because you can't leave the game without taking off your shirt first. Wtf.

[–]PlatinumToasterRape 5 points6 points ago

He quit the club.

[–]MosquitoSenorito 3 points4 points ago

Jacob, keep your shirt on!

[–]Borntowheep 1 point2 points ago

NO.

[–]Joja92 1 point2 points ago

When you're a sore loser, you can't. One kid had almost the same reaction back in my rec soccer days. We had just beat them in a tie breaking kick off. Mad = shirt off, stormed off the field. This was like 9th or 10th grade. Felt good because I already didn't like the kid.

[–]cadet999 -2 points-1 points ago

So he left the game? If this guy isnt Scumbag Steve i dont know who is. "stop soccerball from being kicked into goal, dont need to grab it to keep it from going in the goal." "passed ball by teammate, doesnt pick it up, other team scores, leaves."

[–]SetToGeek 9 points10 points ago

To be fair, he can't pick the ball up when passed by a teammate--it would result in a penalty kick. What he should have done is just kick it away the second it got into his area. The video isn't clear who had touched the ball last though--if it was a teammate he should have kicked it away, if it was a bad hit from the other team (or if it was a teammate who headed it) then he should have picked it up.

[–]Danny843 17 points18 points ago

A back pass that is picked up results in an indirect free kick, not a penalty.

[–]strangler317 6 points7 points ago

If I'm seeing it right then he could have legally picked it up. It appears the defendered passed it back with his chest. The keeper can use his hands on legal back passes that come off any body part except the foot.

[–]DubiumGuy 1 point2 points ago

You're right. The defender didn't touch the ball but was merely shielding it so that the eventual goal scorer couldn't get to it whilst the goal keeper picked it up. You cant see the action from before that however so it may be possible that another team mate back passed before the video started. In that case the goal keeper was right not to pick up, but he still should have just booted it downfield.

[–]Dzerzhinsky 2 points3 points ago

If I may be nitpicky, you never get a penalty for a passback, even if it's in the area. You get an indirect free-kick from where the goalkeeper picked it up. This can lead to some pretty strange situations, such as a team taking an indirect free-kick from the 6 yard line.

[–]xvpmm36 0 points1 point ago

haha this happened a few times back when i used to play soccer. Although i don't think either team has ever scored on the free kick.

[–]cadet999 0 points1 point ago

In the one this Redditor posted it looks like he was passed the ball by a teammate from 2 feet away and a guy on the other team saw an opening and scored. In this case, you'd be right and my lack of soccer knowledge is shown yet again.

[–]shnnrr 0 points1 point ago

Sounds like he was pretty devastated by his blunder.

[–]FartyNapkins -2 points-1 points ago

That's a nasty language they're speaking

[–]CKBeach 99 points100 points ago

YouTube Comment: "Rumour has it this goalkeeper cooked a beautiful meal the other day but was so happy he forgot to eat it"

[–]AdityaK96 21 points22 points ago

Can someone PLEASE find the source?

[–]fresh1010 27 points28 points ago

[–]Strack14 12 points13 points ago

[–]Respondir 2 points3 points ago

I cringed when the keeper was patting himself.

[–]Tstrong420 3 points4 points ago

Just fap man it's ok

[–]dantheflyingman 1 point2 points ago

That moment where he is showing off to the crowd and everyone is staring at him thinking he is an idiot.

[–]lmpervious 1 point2 points ago

So... you want to just link the video instead?

[–]Endomandioviza 1 point2 points ago

Is that valid? When does a penalty end?

[–]greatgildersleeve 0 points1 point ago

When the ball stops

[–]Cullly 0 points1 point ago

It depends if the penalty is in normal time or in a penalty shootout.

In this case the goal stood.

[–]buhder 1 point2 points ago

Funny repost bro

[–]ethnikman 1 point2 points ago

[–]MizerokRominus 5 points6 points ago

That motherfucker was FEELING HIMSELF, SO HARD TOO!!! HAHA!

[–]FTLRalph 12 points13 points ago

Just putting this here because I don't even have to try to be better than those other two comments.

[–]TorpedoJoe 4 points5 points ago

Ok seriously, where in the hell did that spin came from?!

[–]DrumZildjian71 35 points36 points ago

The angle and force of his foot hitting the ball.

[–]uranus86 16 points17 points ago

so romantic

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

Momentum's a bitch.

[–]rijnzael -1 points0 points ago

It's actually not related to momentum that the ball resumed travel towards the goal. The movement was instead to do with the the spin and friction between ball and grass.

[–]holydivar 2 points3 points ago

Actually, this spin you speak of is angular momentum.

[–]rijnzael -2 points-1 points ago

Yeah...I generally don't use phrases like "angular momentum" in comments for a post called "that spin" or with people who think momentum was responsible for the ball resuming travel in the direction opposite its initial velocity after collision. Somehow I don't think GP confused it with subatomic spin.

[–]holydivar 1 point2 points ago

Angular momentum is a fundamental concept in classical mechanics (soccer ball spin) and in quantum mechanics (subatomic spin you speak of).

Forget the quantum stuff. The ball's angular momentum, in the classical sense, IS the ball's spin.

[–]rijnzael 0 points1 point ago

Yes, I know. I was simplifying it for someone who didn't have a good understanding of basic physics. The post itself and the original comment of that thread referenced "spin" and I wasn't going to be a dick and say "actually you mean angular momentum, buddy."

[–]holydivar 0 points1 point ago

Right on Brutha.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

Thank you for that. I was never good at physics at university. I slept in class a lot -___-

[–]Omvega 2 points3 points ago

[–]bigt22 1 point2 points ago

It is a goal unless it is in penalty kicks after extra time in which case it is not a goal because the keeper must merely prevent the ball from scoring on the first attempt.

[–]impossiblyirrelevant 5 points6 points ago

In the video, the kicker points at the ball and one of the refs nods at him, causing him to celebrate. So I'm fairly sure it counted.

[–]benchley 2 points3 points ago

One could convincingly argue that the "first attempt" is still happening when the ball crosses the line.

[–]syo 0 points1 point ago

But the ball's forward progress is stopped. That's all that matters in a shootout. It shouldn't have counted, but the red allowed it for some reason.

[–]benchley 0 points1 point ago

So if a GK parries the ball down onto his own foot, only to have it bounce into the net, no goal? I'd need to be convinced that "forward progress" is the litmus test here.

[–]syo 5 points6 points ago

Actually, I've gotten that wrong.

A kick is successful if, having been touched once by the kicker, it crosses the goal line without going out of play or touching any player other than the defending goalkeeper. The ball may touch the goalkeeper, posts, or crossbar any number of times before going into the net. This was clarified after an incident in the 1986 World Cup shoot-out between Brazil and France. Bruno Bellone's kick rebounded out off the post, hit goalkeeper Carlos's back, and subsequently bounced into the goal. Referee Ioan Igna gave the goal to France, and Brazil captain Edinho was booked for protesting that the kick should have been considered a miss as soon as it rebounded off the post. In 1987, the IFAB clarified Law 14, covering penalty kicks, to support Igna's decision.

Sorry about that. Don't know where I read the forward progress thing.

[–]benchley 0 points1 point ago

You're a gentleman and a scholar. Thanks for looking that up.

[–]TeamOnMyBackDoe 0 points1 point ago

You are correct. The refs actually got it wrong. As soon as the ball moves in the opposite direction, be it by post or the keeper touching it, the play is dead if its a shootout

[–]flip_flap 1 point2 points ago

No this is not correct. If the ball touches a goalkeeper or the post it's still a goal. You must have seen plenty of penalties when either has happened. e.g. Fabregas tonight

[–]TeamOnMyBackDoe -1 points0 points ago

I meant once the ball starts moving in the direction of the kicker. Obviously it can hit the post or keeper but if the ball comes backwards its a dead play

[–]flip_flap 1 point2 points ago

The ball becomes dead if it goes out of the pitch or if the referee decides it is. There's nothing in the rules about it coming backwards.

[–]_oogle -2 points-1 points ago

I think it's pretty funny how almost nobody will realize this because they're all busy circlejerking up top with the assumption that the goal was legitimate.

[–]flip_flap 0 points1 point ago

The striker had only one attempt. He's not allowed to strike the ball again (that would qualify as a second attempt). Look up the rules of the game. If the ball hits the keeper and still goes in then it's a goal.

[–]Seref15 0 points1 point ago

Does that count as an own-goal, or an unsuccessful block?

[–]just_lurkin_here 0 points1 point ago

Yes.

[–]ILikeNaps 0 points1 point ago

He did this a few weeks later

[–]uhmore 1 point2 points ago

Reminds me of Michael Vick.

[–]BCouto 0 points1 point ago

Stupid fucking goalie. You don't celebrate until you know the ball is under control.

[–]xxBeast 0 points1 point ago

lol the goalie walks away like "hell yes!" must have been embarrassed after he turned around and saw it inside the goal

[–]DATRUEF 0 points1 point ago

LMAO!

[–]nfs3freak 0 points1 point ago

[–]damnittkyle 0 points1 point ago

I REALLY wanted to see the goalies reaction

[–]fluxaxion 0 points1 point ago

It's satisfying because he acts like a douche bag.

[–]Carlos1264 0 points1 point ago

What is the name of the goalie?

[–]bananabombboy 0 points1 point ago

A goal's a goal, even if you hit it in with your wang.

[–]Cullly 1 point2 points ago

Wrong. If someone throws it into the goal directly from a throw-in, then a corner kick is given.

[–]bananabombboy -1 points0 points ago

Well that would be against the rules, so it wouldn't be a goal. pretty obvious. You also can't pick the ball up and run it into the goal, that would be a free kick for the other team and possibly a yellow card for you.

[–]PincushionAffair 0 points1 point ago

That hubris

[–]open225 0 points1 point ago

Link to this please

[–]Stonecutter 0 points1 point ago

I want to see the goalie's reaction when he realizes it went in.

[–]tomato_plan 0 points1 point ago

Technically this isn't a goal. Or at least it shouldn't be given as one. If it were in normal play then obviously it is a goal, but in that case the goal keeper would not have reacted in that way, he would have picked the ball up. If it is a penalty shoot-out, then according to the laws of the game; the penalty is deemed to be over once the ball ceases to move foward or has crossed the goal-line. This is more specifically for the case in which the ball hits the crossbar/post rebounds and hits the goalkeeper on the back and end up in the net. This is, in a shootout a miss, not a score. This is effectively the same.

This actually happened in a world cup quarter final match between France and Brazil. The Frenchman Bellone scored a penalty in the penalty shootout that hit the post but rebounded off the brazilian goalkeeper's back into the net. The Brazilian players rightly argued to the referee that the goal be discounted but he did not listen and incorrectly gave it as a score.

[–]tremens 0 points1 point ago

To be honest, I'm not sure I've ever actually seen this rule applied correctly, at least not in professional matches (where it damn well should be.)

This seems like one of those rules that every fan is aware of, but every professional ref is completely clueless about.

[–]gazzawhite 0 points1 point ago

Actually, after that incident, FIFA clarified the rules so that in such events, it is awarded as a goal. So this is a goal.

[–]tomato_plan 1 point2 points ago

cool, any reference?

[–]gazzawhite 0 points1 point ago

[–]tomato_plan 1 point2 points ago

Great thanks for correcting me; that does actually sound like a more reasonable ruling, more in the spirit of what it means to succeed with a penalty kick.

[–]Strongar_04 0 points1 point ago

Link to the video??? Would love to see his reaction when he realized that it went in...

[–]Bullpup 0 points1 point ago

WIIIIILSOOOOOON

[–]therealdensi 0 points1 point ago

That repost

[–]thecross -1 points0 points ago

Wasn't there a goal very similar to this in the 2010 World Cup?

[–]Jjunior130 -5 points-4 points ago

Sauce plz

[–]ProbablyADolphin -1 points0 points ago

Nailed it

[–]deadwisdom -2 points-1 points ago

Dat Irony.